Speculation: US 408 FA removes pax at PHX, people boo 12 Oct 2015

    Hide Wikipost
Old Oct 15, 15, 3:42 am   -   Wikipost
Please read: This is a community-maintained wiki post containing the most important information from this thread. You may edit the Wiki once you have been on FT for 90 days and have made 90 posts.
 
Last edit by: FWAAA
Wiki Link
AA/LUS 408 PHX-PDX 12 Oct 2015: Passenger Ejected, FA Booed by Passengers
Print Wikipost

 

Old Oct 14, 15, 9:29 pm
  #61  
Moderator: Budget Travel forum & Credit Card Programs, FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: YYJ/YVR/SEA
Programs: UA lifetime MM / *A Gold
Posts: 12,943
Originally Posted by DiscHandler View Post
Tiana Fough says she was busy talking while boarding the flight bound for Portland and finding her seat.
Well, there's a reason why some shops have a sign that says:

" you must NOT be talking on the phone while making an order "

With heavy handed interaction and overreaching FAs, I still tend to side with her.

After all, " we're here for your safety "
EmailKid is online now  
Old Oct 14, 15, 11:01 pm
  #62  
Moderator: Manufactured Spending
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 5,931
Originally Posted by milesandmoremiles View Post
So as you can see, there are two completely different accounts so far to this event. How can you make a determination on fault based on whats currently been presented?
I'm not making a determination of fault. I'm saying that I find the passengers' determination of fault to be credible. As I explained earlier, it would be almost impossible for a passenger to say or do something that would justify being removed from the plane without other passengers noticing.

Originally Posted by DiscHandler View Post
So if we assume the following (1) she was on the phone, (2) she didn't hear the attendant multiple times ask her to move, (3) she then responded in a snarky fashion when he became "louder", would that justify a removal? I don't know.
To me, not at all. Neither being on your phone nor using snark is a valid reason to remove someone from the plane. Failure to follow crewmember instructions has to be willful in order for it to merit a penalty. With regards to responding "in a snarky fashion", that is a completely subjective judgment and anyone can make the argument that a comment was snarky.
cbn42 is offline  
Old Oct 14, 15, 11:33 pm
  #63  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Bay Area
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 86
Originally Posted by cbn42 View Post
I'm not making a determination of fault. I'm saying that I find the passengers' determination of fault to be credible. As I explained earlier, it would be almost impossible for a passenger to say or do something that would justify being removed from the plane without other passengers noticing.



To me, not at all. Neither being on your phone nor using snark is a valid reason to remove someone from the plane. Failure to follow crewmember instructions has to be willful in order for it to merit a penalty. With regards to responding "in a snarky fashion", that is a completely subjective judgment and anyone can make the argument that a comment was snarky.
totally disagree, as I noted earlier, many passengers tend to be engaged in their games and phone conversations when they're seated and pretty oblivious (as evidenced by this woman).

As for willful intent, is that the how the regulations are written or is this merely a statement of your feelings on the matter?
DiscHandler is offline  
Old Oct 15, 15, 12:03 am
  #64  
Moderator: Manufactured Spending
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 5,931
Originally Posted by DiscHandler View Post
As for willful intent, is that the how the regulations are written or is this merely a statement of your feelings on the matter?
The regulations state that it is illegal to "interfere" with a crewmember's duties. The willful intent is my opinion. There are many reasons a passenger might fail to follow crewmember instructions, such as having headphones on, not understanding the language, or just being too tired to think. To me, none of them justify removal from the aircraft. Only if the passenger understands the instruction and fails to comply should a penalty be imposed.
cbn42 is offline  
Old Oct 15, 15, 1:17 am
  #65  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: SEA
Programs: AS 75K, TK ELPL, Hilton Diamond, SPG/Marriott Gold
Posts: 7,198
Originally Posted by DiscHandler View Post
totally disagree, as I noted earlier, many passengers tend to be engaged in their games and phone conversations when they're seated and pretty oblivious (as evidenced by this woman).
+1 I think it's entirely plausible that a rude interaction could go by unnoticed by the other passengers nearby - everybody else is focused on other things during the boarding process.
PVDtoDEL is offline  
Old Oct 15, 15, 1:46 am
  #66  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: SFO
Programs: UA GS 1MM / Hilton Diamond / SPG Platinum / Hertz PC
Posts: 248
Welp, after gathering all the info I can, I can only conclude that I really have no clue what actually transpired, who was to blame, or who deserved (or didn't deserve) what.

What I do know, after gathering all the info I can, is that this story just furthers my annoyance with people talking away on their cell phones at times when they need to focus.

Drives me batty.

Gotta get a kick out of ubiquitous cameras and social media as Drama Delivery Devices. Drug-like really. I'm not above relishing the next hit as much as I hate to admit that.

Anyway, that's all I've got.
HoyaSFOIAD is offline  
Old Oct 15, 15, 3:30 am
  #67  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 1
I very recently witnessed similar behavior on a US Airways flight. What might actually help would be for AA to publish the criteria under which an flight attendant is permitted to threaten to remove a passenger, or to actually remove a passenger. Offering a passenger a $250 voucher for having her entire travel plans disrupted is not adequate, nor is it appropriate to create a climate in which other passengers don't know the rules or are simply subject to intimidation if a flight attendant doesn't like them. Passengers pay good money for their seats and their time is as important as anyone's. The criteria under which a flight attendant is empowered to confiscate a customer's time and potentially money should be public, and should consist of more than the vague "obey all crew member instructions." Wouldn't everyone be safer if this were the case? I imagine that personnel regulations prevent the airline from announcing whether disciplinary action is taken against the flight attendant but they need to do more than just offer a voucher. Clear rules need to be published that both the public and flight attendants can count on. I thought that the extreme sanction of removing someone from a flight was intended to address serious threats to the operation or safety of a flight, not the making of snarky comments or talking on one's cell phone. Stress in both passengers and flight attendants may be an inevitable result of policy decisions being made by several airlines that have made flying more difficult and less pleasant. Flight attendants have an important role in protecting safety and need authority to do that, but with power comes responsibility. Clarity as to the rules would protect both sides. Even if the more flight-attendant-friendly version of this story is accurate, it still seems capricious and a considerable overreaction. Flight attendants may be feeling powerless over developments in their industry and be taking out their frustrations on people with even less power, the customers - but that's an explanation, not an excuse. Clear, transparent rules are needed.

Last edited by lrgphd; Oct 15, 15 at 3:46 am
lrgphd is offline  
Old Oct 15, 15, 9:19 am
  #68  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Brighton. UK
Programs: BA (GOLD), VS
Posts: 9,341
from the washington post

She believes she was arbitrarily chosen to get off the flight to make room for a man who took her seat almost immediately after she was asked to leave.

“It’s a little coincidental that I’m being attacked verbally for no reason, and then all of a sudden another guy is getting my seat,” she said.
UKtravelbear is online now  
Old Oct 15, 15, 10:44 am
  #69  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Programs: AA lifetime gold, Marrriott Platinum
Posts: 158
Woman removed from AA flight

Does anyone have some insight into this:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/m...-off-a-flight/

I'm guessing she bought a Priceline type ticket and when a full fare passenger showed up an IDB was the result.
cmcc is offline  
Old Oct 15, 15, 10:52 am
  #70  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Benicia CA
Programs: Alaska MVP Gold 75K, AA 3.8MM, UA 1.1MM, enjoying the retired life
Posts: 30,828
See:
Speculation: US 408 FA removes pax at PHX, people boo 12 Oct 2015
tom911 is online now  
Old Oct 15, 15, 10:58 am
  #71  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Programs: AA lifetime gold, Marrriott Platinum
Posts: 158
Thanks!
cmcc is offline  
Old Oct 15, 15, 11:17 am
  #72  
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: DFW
Programs: AA PLT
Posts: 265
I'm a little surprised that all those passengers saying they'd never fly AA again couldn't tell the difference between a US Airways cabin crew and an AA one.
Kate2015 is offline  
Old Oct 15, 15, 11:18 am
  #73  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,790
Originally Posted by UKtravelbear View Post
The plot thickens . . .

Interesting quote from the Washington Post article:

American Airlines wrote in an e-mail statement to The Washington Post early Thursday that the incident has been taken care of.

“We are in contact with the passenger and have apologized,” the statement reads. “We have addressed the issue with our team members to ensure we provide a consistent, quality travel experience for our customers in the future.”
Sounds like an out-of-control flight attendant. This passenger encountered a male "Helen" in Phoenix.

Originally Posted by elitetraveler View Post
- Rebooking the pax on the next flight is an indicator that AA couldn't determine bad behavior by the pax

- As I mentioned upstream, good service professionals recognize they are likely to encounter "bad behavior" ongoing and know how to diffuse it or let it run by without escalating a situation.
I'd say you nailed it. Not only did AA rebook, but they apologized and put the blame on the "team members" who screwed up.
FWAAA is offline  
Old Oct 15, 15, 11:22 am
  #74  
Moderator: Budget Travel forum & Credit Card Programs, FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: YYJ/YVR/SEA
Programs: UA lifetime MM / *A Gold
Posts: 12,943
Originally Posted by Kate2015 View Post
I'm a little surprised that all those passengers saying they'd never fly AA again couldn't tell the difference between a US Airways cabin crew and an AA one.
Considering how much larger AA is than US, it is possible that many/most purchased tickets on AA.com. And they may be aware that US is going away for good (well in this case ... ) VERY soon.
EmailKid is online now  
Old Oct 15, 15, 11:29 am
  #75  
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: DFW
Programs: AA PLT
Posts: 265
Originally Posted by EmailKid View Post
Considering how much larger AA is than US, it is possible that many/most purchased tickets on AA.com. And they may be aware that US is going away for good (well in this case ... ) VERY soon.
Sure, but the crews will remain.

Oh, just me that avoids US flights like the plague? Ok.
Kate2015 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread